When a property is cited by Municipal Code Compliance (MCC) and the "nuisance" they declare not addressed within a fifteen day period, the property owner is taken before the Special Master. This is really the old Municipal Code Enforcement Board, changed in 2008 from an actual board to a single Special Masters, still a Mayoral appointment.
This is found in Section 91 of the ordinance code.
This is the actual ordinance for the rolling fines.
QuoteSec. 91.107. Penalties—Administrative fines; costs of repairs; liens.permanent link to this piece of content
(a)
The Board, upon notification by the City official that an order of the Board has not been complied with by the time set or, upon finding that a repeat violation has been committed, may order the violator to pay an administrative fine in an amount specified by this Section for each day the violation continues past the date set by the Board for compliance or, in the case of a repeat violation, for each day the repeat violation continues, beginning with the date the repeat violation is found to have occurred by the code inspector, or in the case of a repeat violation which is irreparable or irreversible in nature, for each violation that occurs. In addition, if the violation is a violation described in Section 91.105(d), the Board shall notify the department responsible for enforcement of the Ordinance Code Chapter, and such department, for and on behalf of the City, may make all reasonable repairs which are required to bring the property into compliance and the Board shall charge the violator with such cost of repairs along with any fine imposed pursuant to this Section. Making such repairs does not create a continuing obligation on the part of the local governing body to make further repairs or to maintain the property and does not create any liability against the local governing body for any damages to the property if such repairs were completed in good faith. No notice or hearing shall be necessary for the Board to record a lien for nonpayment of an administrative fine previously imposed by order of the Board.
(b)
A fine imposed pursuant to this Section shall not exceed $250 per day for a first violation and shall not exceed $500 per day for a repeat violation, and, in addition, may include all costs of repairs pursuant to subsection (a) of this Section. However, if the Board finds the violation to be irreparable or irreversible in nature, it may impose a fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation.
(c)
In determining the amount of the fine, if any, the Board shall consider the following factors:
(1)
The gravity of the violation;
(2)
Any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; and
(3)
Any previous violations committed by the violator.
(d)
The Board may reduce a fine imposed pursuant to this Section.
(e)
A certified copy of an order of the Board imposing an administrative fine, or a fine plus repair costs, may be recorded in the public records and thereafter shall constitute a lien against the land on which the violation exists and upon any other real or personal property owned by the violator. Upon petition to the circuit court, such order shall be enforceable in the same manner as a court judgment by the sheriffs of this State, including execution and levy against the personal property of the violator, but such order shall not be deemed to be a court judgment except for enforcement purposes. A fine imposed pursuant to this Section shall continue to accrue until the violator comes into compliance or until judgment is rendered in a suit to foreclose on a lien filed pursuant to this Section, whichever occurs first. A lien arising from a fine imposed pursuant to this Section runs in favor of the City, and the General Counsel or his designee may execute a satisfaction or release of lien entered pursuant to this Section. After three months from the filing of any such lien which remains unpaid, the General Counsel's Office is authorized to foreclose on the lien. No lien created pursuant to the provisions of this Section may be foreclosed on real property which is a homestead under Section 4, Article X of the State Constitution.
(Ord. 87-1486-838, § 1; Ord. 89-1150-630, § 6; Ord. 94-838-446, § 2; Ord. 2000-301-E, § 4)
You can also see that this part of ordinance has not been changed since 2000. However, there have been changes to various ordinances effecting these fines and there have been ordinances increasing the powers of the MCC Chief.
The purpose of these fines is simple. It is a punitive measure to try to force property owners to take care of their property. On the surface, it may seem like a good thing. However, it most often is the kiss of death for a property in the poorer communities. They also become a tool for the officers at MCC to use.
Let's look at a recent property in Springfield. The property was condemned. Frankly, the home owner, both physically and financially challenged, made a big mistake when he tried, improperly, to perform a repair. Preservation SOS and the entire community stepped up and saved the house from demolition, which was exactly what MCC wanted to immediately do. This house is a legal duplex and has two separate RE numbers and therefore has two separate condemnation cases on it. This is simply because the house was left to two brothers and so each owns one floor. Yes, a bit more complicated than the average duplex even. The owners, challenged as they are, have been trying at least to comply. Due to some personal family issues, work is going slowly and as the one brother who was living in the house is very poor, this house is always at risk from MCC. In fact, because there are two cases, the MCC officer schedules the two cases one month apart. Hmmm, odd when he of course knows that this is really one structure and one family as owners. Job security or something else?
While we have been able to talk to the special masters in the past and tell her that it is one structure ourselves, sometime recently we missed a hearing. The owner did go to one and got more time. After all, as it says in the code, if progress is being made, then there is no reason to fine. However, the owner did not informed us and quite possibly the owner did not know or he did not understand about that second meeting. The MCC officer apparently felt the need to get those rolling fines going on this structure and so did not inform the Special Masters that she had given this same structure more time just a few weeks early so the house in now getting rolling fines on one case while the Special Masters is recognizing the owner is trying on the other case. In the big picture, the rolling fines on one case may very well prevent this house from ever being out of condemnation even though the owner is doing his best. Did the MCC officer do this because he is that bad at his job that he can't put 2 and 2 together or did he purposeful not tell the Special Masters that this was indeed the same structure?
There are many horror stories about the rolling fines. The one above simply helps illustrate how badly MCC is administering the powers handed over to them. I will, and I invite others to , add some of those stories right here.
Next, what about a nice little duplex in Springfield that several have tried to buy recently but the rolling fines have contaminated the property so badly, no one can. What do you think is the ultimate fate of a house that a potential buyer would have to have cash only and risk having to pay to MCC a sum many times the value of the house even if in perfect condition? Eventually, MCC will win the battle and call this house an emergency demolition. Perhaps since no one can work on it without their permission, it will become that imminent threat to public safety. But hey, at least they can;t use those federal funds to tear it down anymore.
We can add another horror story here. A condemned house on West 6th St was about to get redone. The buyer was ready and able to get the house done. During the title work, rolling fines were discovered and apparently after conversations with MCC, the seller said screw it and took the house off the market. I can only guess at this point that the problem is that the fines attached to other property the seller owns and would still be there after the sale. Or perhaps MCC decided to grab whatever cash the seller was getting, after all, the federal funding seems to be a bit too hard to use these days, all those pesky regulations they now actually have to follow. The Buyer knows about rolling fines and could and would work around them and make that deal with MCC. However, the way the MCC chief, Ms Scott, has her minions do things, they chased off the seller and now a house still sits, deteriorating because of reckless polices.
Kimberly Scott needs to go, the leadership in Municipal Code Compliance needs to be changed and new people brought in that understand that by helping people, everyone wins. Except maybe the demo contractors Kimberly Scott seems to so dearly love.
I can't fault Kim Scott for what we all know is BUYER BEWARE, after all, for 100 bucks the prospective buyers could have done an exhaustive TITLE search, I've even seen awesome title searches for as little as 25 bucks, and find the fines and liens. This is not rocket science.
If you can give the address, we can see if we can find the liens ourselves in public.
While normally it is indeed the buyer who runs when rolling fines are found, in this recent case, the punitive rolling fines sent the SELLER away from the table, the buyer would and could work round the rolling fines. Isn't what we all want with these houses, isn't the reason punitive measures are supposedly used is to either force the current owner to fix or sell so the house/ issues get fixed? And remember that this is a protected structure within an historic district so the city does indeed have a responsibility to protect this house and insure it is here for future generations. Apparently rather than do what is right, Kimberly Scott has instructed her minions to be as obstructionist as possible. How is that the best thing for public safety? Or even the entire city?
We have a department that is paid for by us tax payers that is abusing federal funds, ignoring property rights, ignoring common sense, ignoring laws and hurting the very neighborhoods they are charged with protecting.
Rolling fines do not appear in the normal city data bases like property search or the tax info. Some city liens do and some do not. I have no idea why it is that way, but it is. All do indeed show up/ can be found in a proper title search. They will show up in the MCC case files too. So it is a good idea to get that file before you comment to buy a house that has been condemned or even just has had a open MCC case file in the past. Houses can get rolling fines even though they have not been condemned.
QuoteRolling fines do not appear in the normal city data bases like property search or the tax info. Some city liens do and some do not. I have no idea why it is that way, but it is.
I can't believe this to be true, but I think I saw a picture of bigfoot on Facebook, so stranger things rule the day. Again though, why not pick up the phone and call code enforcement and ask for the fines on the property? Again, buyer beware, you have to do some research on a property, especially those that have been sitting for years empty, surely somewhere, someone has a nuisance issue with the property.
Quote from: mtraininjax on January 12, 2014, 12:51:18 PM
QuoteRolling fines do not appear in the normal city data bases like property search or the tax info. Some city liens do and some do not. I have no idea why it is that way, but it is.
I can't believe this to be true, but I think I saw a picture of bigfoot on Facebook, so stranger things rule the day. Again though, why not pick up the phone and call code enforcement and ask for the fines on the property? Again, buyer beware, you have to do some research on a property, especially those that have been sitting for years empty, surely somewhere, someone has a nuisance issue with the property.
Buyer beware? Did you read the post? The buyer was willing to work with the system and do the deal. MCC chased off the seller, maybe because they couldn't chase off the buyer.
Meanwhile, go to the normal databases and see if you can find the rolling fines on 229 East 2nd St. It has lots, but the normal databases mentioned did not bring them up. Ask the city why because I do not know.
While there has been much talk in some circles about doing something about the punitive and actually pretty dumb rolling fine situation, no one has actually done anything and MCC still gets the Special Master, who I have been told actually works for MCC, to fine owners. Regardless of whatever else you think about the situation, realize the thousands upon thousands of tax payers dollars spent getting the fines levied and then keeping tract of them. And then put in the public records request to see just how little are actually collected in anyway.
Rolling fines further bruise historic buildings. And needlessly.